linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 08/46] kernel: MOve prototype declaration to header file include/linux/perf

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Thu, 27 Feb 2014 20:23:35 +0100
From:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:	Josh Triplett <josh@...htriplett.org>
Cc:	Rashika Kheria <rashika.kheria@...il.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
	Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...stprotocols.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 08/46] kernel: MOve prototype declaration to header file
 include/linux/perf_event.h

On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 07:51:50AM -0800, Josh Triplett wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 12:54:14PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 05:02:48PM +0530, Rashika Kheria wrote:
> > > Add prototype declaration of function to header file
> > > include/linux/perf_event.h because it is used by more than one file.
> > > 
> > > This eliminates the following warning in kernel/events/core.c:
> > > kernel/events/core.c:3743:13: warning: no previous prototype for ‘arch_perf_update_userpage’ [-Wmissing-prototypes]
> > 
> > # git grep arch_perf_update_userpage
> > arch/x86/kernel/cpu/perf_event.c:void arch_perf_update_userpage(struct perf_event_mmap_page *userpg, u64 now)
> > kernel/events/core.c:void __weak arch_perf_update_userpage(struct perf_event_mmap_page *userpg, u64 now)
> > kernel/events/core.c:   arch_perf_update_userpage(userpg, now);
> > 
> > 
> > There's two definitions; one weak, and one usage site.
> > 
> > What gives?
> 
> There's no prototype for the function anywhere, so -Wmissing-prototypes
> rightfully complains.  Adding the prototype to a header included in both
> source files ensures that the function signatures must match, and
> eliminates the warning.

Definitions don't require prior declarations. Only usage without prior
definitions require them.

I still don't see a problem.

Seems to me you're just blindly making a stupid checker happy, just
shoot it in the face.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/